Saturday's letters: Founding principles

Published: Saturday, December 29, 2012 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Friday, December 28, 2012 at 8:00 p.m.

To the editor: Recently, a letter writer described the tea party as “far right.” I am not a tea party member. However, my research on the various groups under this name indicates they are for limited government and a return to constitutional principles as the basis for laws and governing constructs.

The writer suggested that such a group is a part of our problem. As a history teacher, I know for a fact that limited government and a constitutional republic were the basis of our founding. Therefore, if you do not support these two founding principles, I would contend that you are the problem, not the tea party.

I believe in competing in the arena of ideas; I believe you must be able to sell your ideas to the broader public. I also believe we have become intellectually “soft.” We would rather “give in” to ideas we do not believe in rather than work harder and explain them better. Politics is a struggle for power and control.

I will never support the governing philosophy of the so-called “left”; I will always support the principles of freedom. And I will never leave the arena of ideas.

Jim Griffin

Hendersonville

Time to grow up

To the editor: On Dec. 7, John Fogle had a column headlined, “And the winner is ... dirty campaigning.” After reading his vile words, I must reply.

Let’s turn the clocks back to a few days before April 14, 1865, and let’s imagine listening to a conversation between John Wilkes Booth and his conspirators. They hated, also. They hated Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War, that election, abolition ... and they were going to do something about it.

They were not able to handle living in a democracy. In politics, just as in life, you don’t always win, but in a democracy you are supposed to live with it either way and go on working for the good of the nation. I am sure through the years of our nation’s history, there have been election results that were painful to the losing side. The losers went on in a grown-up manner.

It is time for Mr. Fogle to grow up. Your side lost. Your side was outworked. Why do losers have such a problem looking at themselves? It is always the other guy’s fault.

Your character assassination of Harry Reid is just an example. Mitt Romney had an easy way to refute Reid’s claims. He didn’t!

Dennis P. Berman

Hendersonville

The vile and venal

To the editor: This letter is written in response to Stephen Black’s recent column, “Censors would kill Playhouse spirit.” He laments the fact that local government plans to support the current operations of the Playhouse.

He mentions that future plays will forgo foul language, sex and tawdriness, and that is bad! He says that a theater is not supposed to represent life as theocrats and fundamental Christians see it. He further opines that a play should paint a picture of life — warts and all. He is also concerned that religionists will take over any artistic endeavor.

As to his position, I take extreme exception. Case in point, I just finished reading “Anna Karenina” by Leo Tolstoy — all 814 pages. In this magnificent novel, virtually every aspect of evil, sin, deceit, vile behavior and human failing is described and leaves nothing to interpretation. In addition, not one expletive is to be found! If an author or playwright has to resort to the vile and venal, then he lacks the ability to express himself in an artistic manner.

Mr. Black mentioned Franz Kafka, who also famously said, “When one has once accepted and absorbed Evil, it no longer demands to be believed.”

Ken Rash

Hendersonville

Assault weapons

To the editor: Recently the Times-News greeted me with local poll results indicating that 49 percent of locals believe assault weapons should not be banned from U.S. citizens. I am appalled!

I’ve read many reasons why people believe such weapons must be banned, but I have not heard from the other side. I would like to encourage those who believe our citizens have a right to own weapons designed to kill other citizens explain their reasons.

Please, if you choose to respond to this, limit your answers to those that apply to assault weapons only — not other guns.

<p>To the editor: Recently, a letter writer described the tea party as far right. I am not a tea party member. However, my research on the various groups under this name indicates they are for limited government and a return to constitutional principles as the basis for laws and governing constructs.</p><p>The writer suggested that such a group is a part of our problem. As a history teacher, I know for a fact that limited government and a constitutional republic were the basis of our founding. Therefore, if you do not support these two founding principles, I would contend that you are the problem, not the tea party.</p><p>I believe in competing in the arena of ideas; I believe you must be able to sell your ideas to the broader public. I also believe we have become intellectually soft. We would rather give in to ideas we do not believe in rather than work harder and explain them better. Politics is a struggle for power and control.</p><p>I will never support the governing philosophy of the so-called left; I will always support the principles of freedom. And I will never leave the arena of ideas.</p><p><em>Jim Griffin</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Time to grow up</h3>
<p>To the editor: On Dec. 7, John Fogle had a column headlined, And the winner is ... dirty campaigning. After reading his vile words, I must reply.</p><p>Let’s turn the clocks back to a few days before April 14, 1865, and let’s imagine listening to a conversation between John Wilkes Booth and his conspirators. They hated, also. They hated Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War, that election, abolition ... and they were going to do something about it.</p><p>They were not able to handle living in a democracy. In politics, just as in life, you don’t always win, but in a democracy you are supposed to live with it either way and go on working for the good of the nation. I am sure through the years of our nation’s history, there have been election results that were painful to the losing side. The losers went on in a grown-up manner.</p><p>It is time for Mr. Fogle to grow up. Your side lost. Your side was outworked. Why do losers have such a problem looking at themselves? It is always the other guy’s fault.</p><p>Your character assassination of Harry Reid is just an example. Mitt Romney had an easy way to refute Reid’s claims. He didn’t!</p><p><em>Dennis P. Berman</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>The vile and venal</h3>
<p>To the editor: This letter is written in response to Stephen Black’s recent column, Censors would kill Playhouse spirit. He laments the fact that local government plans to support the current operations of the Playhouse.</p><p>He mentions that future plays will forgo foul language, sex and tawdriness, and that is bad! He says that a theater is not supposed to represent life as theocrats and fundamental Christians see it. He further opines that a play should paint a picture of life  warts and all. He is also concerned that religionists will take over any artistic endeavor.</p><p>As to his position, I take extreme exception. Case in point, I just finished reading Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy  all 814 pages. In this magnificent novel, virtually every aspect of evil, sin, deceit, vile behavior and human failing is described and leaves nothing to interpretation. In addition, not one expletive is to be found! If an author or playwright has to resort to the vile and venal, then he lacks the ability to express himself in an artistic manner.</p><p>Mr. Black mentioned Franz Kafka, who also famously said, When one has once accepted and absorbed Evil, it no longer demands to be believed.</p><p><em>Ken Rash</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Assault weapons</h3>
<p>To the editor: Recently the Times-News greeted me with local poll results indicating that 49 percent of locals believe assault weapons should not be banned from U.S. citizens. I am appalled!</p><p>I’ve read many reasons why people believe such weapons must be banned, but I have not heard from the other side. I would like to encourage those who believe our citizens have a right to own weapons designed to kill other citizens explain their reasons.</p><p>Please, if you choose to respond to this, limit your answers to those that apply to assault weapons only  not other guns.</p><p><em>Cosette Goebel</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p>